You have to love media/gov marketing/hype/voodoo/FUD. In the article they state: "heavily encrypted" laptop ... Followed by: "containing a "massive quantity of stolen financial account data," How would they know there is a massive quantity of stolen anything unless 1) They decrypted it 2) They're using FUD

I use TrueCrypt and in the event I were to become arrested, I wouldn't disclose any information on how to decrypt anything. That is for my lawyer to sort out. I have ZERO to hide yet in this situation, the news report would be the same: "Hacker with encrypted laptop containing..." Containing what? How can they make statements like this. While I in no way am defending this guy, its deplorable that in this country, it's supposed to be "innocent until proven guilty."

As for decrypting data, applying a targeted bruteforce might yield them the password to decrypt it. Don't be fooled by the hype of cluebie news reporters. For example: If I create a 4096 bit RSA key for PGP to encrypt data, sure its beyond decryption. However, if my password is/was "scoobydoo", a bruteforce attack against that would decrypt it in minutes (if not seconds).

True story, take it with a grain of salt... "So a hacker gets arrested, in his possession are an OpenBSD laptop, and when questioned by the feds: 'Do you know Unix?', he responds sure I do, know it like the back of my hand..." On trial the hackers answer was explained/became:

DA to Special Agent: "And what did Mr. Smith tell you when asked of his Unix experience?"SA on stand: "With a smirk he gleefully boasted how well he knew Unix"DA to Special Agent: "Was there anything out of the ordinary on his laptop?"SA on stand: "Very strong encryption programs..."

Very strong encryption programs... Never knew it would be illegal to have strong encryption programs (it isn't illegal by the way). This continued and after a whole shellacking of twisting and distorting things... An innocent man went to prison. That's a grain of salt for you. So when I make statements like: "I wouldn't give them squat" (passwords) its for a very valid reason. Rule of thumb: You have the right to remain silent... This isn't a crime, nor is withholding your password until you speak with your lawyer. If I were this guys attorney, I'd have a field day with the press who obviously convicted him without allowing him to stand trial

"If a guy from Malaysia can get into networks like this, you can imagine what the Chinese and Russians, the people with real capabilities, are able to do," said one former senior U.S. intelligence official, who monitored cyberthreats and asked for anonymity in order to speak candidly.

My favorite sentence of that whole article, because we all know you have to be from China or Russia to be a good hacker. *facedesk*